1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The 3rd underground floors and the 3rd underground floors as the size of the 4rd underground floors, and the 2nd underground floors as the parking lot, and the 1st underground floors from the 1st to the 4th underground floors, respectively, are being used as each retail market in the area of the 3rd underground floors and the 3rd underground floors from the 1st underground floors to the 4th underground floors.

The building of this case consists of five sections for exclusive use (No. 01, No. 01, No. 01, No. 01, No. 21, No. 01, and No. 31, No. 01, and No. 01, No. 41) for each floor from 1st to 4th above ground. Each section for exclusive use is jointly owned by several persons.

B. The Plaintiff (formerly named D Management Committee) is a management body under the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings comprised of sectional owners of the instant building, and the Defendant served as the manager of the instant building from December 26, 2013 to March 25, 2015.

C. On June 2, 2014, the Defendant, as the representative of the Plaintiff, concluded a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with E, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 80,000,000 for the entire fourth floor of the instant building (hereinafter “the instant building”) as KRW 9,000 for the rent month, KRW 9,000 for the rent month, and KRW 2 years from the completion date of the life expectancy, and KRW 20,000 for the management deposit.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence No. 2, and the purport of whole pleading

2. The parties' assertion

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant, as the representative of the Plaintiff, entered into the instant lease agreement without obtaining the consent of a majority of the co-ownership shares on the instant building. E is the spouse of G, a party to the F, who was in a dispute with the Plaintiff in connection with the management of the instant building, and is likely to cause a dispute again between the Plaintiff and F by entering into the instant lease agreement, and the Plaintiff inevitably delivers the instant building portion to the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff pays KRW 50,00,000 to E.